RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03505 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry level separation and his reentry (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of his enlistment, he did not have much understanding of the English language. He struggled speaking and understanding it. He failed a test in basic military training (BMT) and subsequently failed two tests in technical school, which resulted in his discharge. He is confident that his knowledge of the English language has increased and has a better understanding of it. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 12 Jan 04 separation. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force, on 5 Aug 03, for a period of six years, in the grade of airman basic (E1/AB). On 30 Dec 03, the commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for entry-level performance or conduct. The reasons for the proposed action were based on the applicant’s failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program. He was eliminated from the Security Forces Apprentice training course for unsatisfactory performance after failing Test 1, Version B, Retest of Test 1, Version A, and Retest of Test 1, Version C, with scores of 62%, 66% and 62% respectively. The minimum passing score was 70%. Prior to disenrollment, the applicant was counseled concerning his performance, was washed back twice and received four hours of Special Individualized Assistance (SIA). Efforts to improve his performance were met with negative results. On that same date, the applicant waived his right to counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf. The deputy chief, adverse actions found the case file legally sufficient and the discharge authority directed discharge with an entry-level separation, without probation and rehabilitation. On 12 Jan 04, the applicant received an uncharacterized entry- level separation, with a reason for separation of entry level performance and conduct, and was issued an RE code of 2C. He was credited with five months and eight days of active duty service. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, stating, in part, based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel record, the applicant had difficulty with the English language, which led to him not understanding of the security forces course. They found the discharge, to include the reason for separation, was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence or identify any errors or injustices in the discharge processing, warranting a change to his narrative reason for separation and separation code. Additionally, they noted that airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when the separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined that if a member served less than 180 days continuous service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. The uncharacterized service, which resulted in the RE code of 2C, is appropriate and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, stating, in part, the applicant received the reentry code of 2C based on his entry level separation, with uncharacterized service. They noted the applicant failed to demonstrate any error or injustice. The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 25 Mar 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice warranting a change in the reason for separation. As noted above, we believe the separation action taken against the applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction. However, after a thorough review of the facts and circumstances of this case, we find the narrative reason for his separation; i.e., entry level performance and conduct, to be overly harsh. The available evidence indicates it was the applicant’s academic deficiency that ultimately resulted in his separation, and not any misconduct. Therefore, in order to correct the injustice of improperly labeling the applicant, his narrative reason for separation should be corrected to accurately reflect the circumstances of his separation. Accordingly, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his narrative reason for separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued as a result of his entry level separation on 12 January 2004. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-03505 in Executive Session on 28 June 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Sep 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 27 Jan 11. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 Feb 11. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 11.